3 ms·

I recently saw pictures of social distancing circles drawn on the grass in parks [1]. They were drawn in a square grid. It would be more space-efficient to draw

I recently saw pictures of social distancing circles drawn on the grass in parks [1]. They were drawn in a square grid. It would be more space-efficient to draw them in a hexagonal packing arrangement. [1] example: https://images.foxtv.com/static.ktvu.com/www.ktvu.com/content/uploads/2020/05/724/407/A79C558C64154B59A31E5D70963CFB76.jpg?ve=1&tl=1 https://images.foxtv.com/static.ktvu.com/www.ktvu.com/conten...

skrebbel 6y ago
I don't think space efficiency is a goal
- jakear 6y ago
  Indeed. Having lots of space between the circles is a better goal, as that way people in motion also maintain distance.
  - jka 6y ago
    Circular markers could also be a lot easier to create repeatably and quickly (for example, using a pole and string) by staff responsible for creating distancing markers.
- adrianmonk 6y ago
  They might have enough land in this park that they are not worried about running out of space before they can fit enough people in. In that sense, space efficiency probably isn't a goal. However, in the context of social distancing, 2m is a guideline, but additional distance will reduce your risk more. You can flip the question on its head and ask, if I used larger circles (such as 3m or 4m), is there an arrangement I could use to still fit the people into the area? If so, then using this arrangement should reduce risk further than using an arrangement that can only accommodate 2m circles. In other words, even if you are below max capacity and meeting the 2m minimum, different arrangements still have different levels of risk of transmission. Of course, at low enough densities, the gain becomes negligible.
Symbiote 6y ago
There's a picture from a Belgian school using hexagons. https://www.theguardian.com/world/gallery/2020/may/30/how-we-live-now-social-distancing-across-the-globe-in-pictures#img-12 https://www.theguardian.com/world/gallery/2020/may/30/how-we...

skrebbel 6y ago

I don't think space efficiency is a goal

jakear 6y ago
Indeed. Having lots of space between the circles is a better goal, as that way people in motion also maintain distance.
- jka 6y ago
  Circular markers could also be a lot easier to create repeatably and quickly (for example, using a pole and string) by staff responsible for creating distancing markers.
adrianmonk 6y ago
They might have enough land in this park that they are not worried about running out of space before they can fit enough people in. In that sense, space efficiency probably isn't a goal. However, in the context of social distancing, 2m is a guideline, but additional distance will reduce your risk more. You can flip the question on its head and ask, if I used larger circles (such as 3m or 4m), is there an arrangement I could use to still fit the people into the area? If so, then using this arrangement should reduce risk further than using an arrangement that can only accommodate 2m circles. In other words, even if you are below max capacity and meeting the 2m minimum, different arrangements still have different levels of risk of transmission. Of course, at low enough densities, the gain becomes negligible.

Symbiote 6y ago

There's a picture from a Belgian school using hexagons. https://www.theguardian.com/world/gallery/2020/may/30/how-we-live-now-social-distancing-across-the-globe-in-pictures#img-12 https://www.theguardian.com/world/gallery/2020/may/30/how-we...